On Thu, 13 Feb 2003, siivv wrote:

> On Wed, 12 Feb 2003, pf-list wrote:
>
> > For the life of me I couldn't figure out why my logs were filling so fast
> > and yet there were only a few packets actually in them.  When I listened
> > to pflog0 I found 1000s of dhcp server broadcasts that were being blocked
> > as par my ruleset (block that which I didn't request.)
> > I analyze my logs by the following:
> > tcpdump -ttt -n -e -r /var/log/pflog
> >
> > Yet the dhcp from port 67 to port 68 messages don't appear in my tcpdump
> > of the log.  The rule I ended up adding to stop the blocking of the
> > packets is the following:
> > pass in quick on xl0 proto udp from 10.33.160.1 port 67 to any port 68
> >
> > But for some reason the tcpdump doesn't show the packets in /var/log/pflog
>
>
> you are missing the log param
> pass in quick log on x10 proto...

No that rule was written intetionally so that the packets would no longer
be blocked.  However, I still should have been able to see the packets via
tcpdumping /var/log/pflog and I never could.  The only reason I discovered
my logs were filling so fast was running ethereal on pflog0.  With the new
rule in place instead of my logs filling and rotating about twice a day
they fill and rotate about once per week.  So where were the packets, why
couldn't I see them via tcpdump of pflog?

> > > > Is this a bug or am I confused or doing something improperly? > >
> > -quel
> >
> >
>
>

Reply via email to